CA2896116C - Non-pilling antiseptic hand rub compositions comprising phenoxyethanol and isopropyl myristate as an antipilling agent - Google Patents

Non-pilling antiseptic hand rub compositions comprising phenoxyethanol and isopropyl myristate as an antipilling agent Download PDF

Info

Publication number
CA2896116C
CA2896116C CA2896116A CA2896116A CA2896116C CA 2896116 C CA2896116 C CA 2896116C CA 2896116 A CA2896116 A CA 2896116A CA 2896116 A CA2896116 A CA 2896116A CA 2896116 C CA2896116 C CA 2896116C
Authority
CA
Canada
Prior art keywords
isopropyl
pilling
composition
hand rub
isopropyl myristate
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Active
Application number
CA2896116A
Other languages
French (fr)
Other versions
CA2896116A1 (en
Inventor
Steven Kritzler
Hyo Sang Kwon
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Novapharm Research Australia Pty Ltd
Original Assignee
Novapharm Research Australia Pty Ltd
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Priority claimed from AU2012905697A external-priority patent/AU2012905697A0/en
Application filed by Novapharm Research Australia Pty Ltd filed Critical Novapharm Research Australia Pty Ltd
Publication of CA2896116A1 publication Critical patent/CA2896116A1/en
Application granted granted Critical
Publication of CA2896116C publication Critical patent/CA2896116C/en
Active legal-status Critical Current
Anticipated expiration legal-status Critical

Links

Classifications

    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A01—AGRICULTURE; FORESTRY; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; HUNTING; TRAPPING; FISHING
    • A01N—PRESERVATION OF BODIES OF HUMANS OR ANIMALS OR PLANTS OR PARTS THEREOF; BIOCIDES, e.g. AS DISINFECTANTS, AS PESTICIDES OR AS HERBICIDES; PEST REPELLANTS OR ATTRACTANTS; PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS
    • A01N25/00—Biocides, pest repellants or attractants, or plant growth regulators, characterised by their forms, or by their non-active ingredients or by their methods of application, e.g. seed treatment or sequential application; Substances for reducing the noxious effect of the active ingredients to organisms other than pests
    • A01N25/02—Biocides, pest repellants or attractants, or plant growth regulators, characterised by their forms, or by their non-active ingredients or by their methods of application, e.g. seed treatment or sequential application; Substances for reducing the noxious effect of the active ingredients to organisms other than pests containing liquids as carriers, diluents or solvents
    • A01N25/04—Dispersions, emulsions, suspoemulsions, suspension concentrates or gels
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A01—AGRICULTURE; FORESTRY; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; HUNTING; TRAPPING; FISHING
    • A01N—PRESERVATION OF BODIES OF HUMANS OR ANIMALS OR PLANTS OR PARTS THEREOF; BIOCIDES, e.g. AS DISINFECTANTS, AS PESTICIDES OR AS HERBICIDES; PEST REPELLANTS OR ATTRACTANTS; PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS
    • A01N31/00—Biocides, pest repellants or attractants, or plant growth regulators containing organic oxygen or sulfur compounds
    • A01N31/02—Acyclic compounds
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A01—AGRICULTURE; FORESTRY; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; HUNTING; TRAPPING; FISHING
    • A01N—PRESERVATION OF BODIES OF HUMANS OR ANIMALS OR PLANTS OR PARTS THEREOF; BIOCIDES, e.g. AS DISINFECTANTS, AS PESTICIDES OR AS HERBICIDES; PEST REPELLANTS OR ATTRACTANTS; PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS
    • A01N31/00—Biocides, pest repellants or attractants, or plant growth regulators containing organic oxygen or sulfur compounds
    • A01N31/08—Oxygen or sulfur directly attached to an aromatic ring system
    • A01N31/14—Ethers
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A01—AGRICULTURE; FORESTRY; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; HUNTING; TRAPPING; FISHING
    • A01N—PRESERVATION OF BODIES OF HUMANS OR ANIMALS OR PLANTS OR PARTS THEREOF; BIOCIDES, e.g. AS DISINFECTANTS, AS PESTICIDES OR AS HERBICIDES; PEST REPELLANTS OR ATTRACTANTS; PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS
    • A01N31/00—Biocides, pest repellants or attractants, or plant growth regulators containing organic oxygen or sulfur compounds
    • A01N31/08—Oxygen or sulfur directly attached to an aromatic ring system
    • A01N31/16—Oxygen or sulfur directly attached to an aromatic ring system with two or more oxygen or sulfur atoms directly attached to the same aromatic ring system
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A01—AGRICULTURE; FORESTRY; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; HUNTING; TRAPPING; FISHING
    • A01N—PRESERVATION OF BODIES OF HUMANS OR ANIMALS OR PLANTS OR PARTS THEREOF; BIOCIDES, e.g. AS DISINFECTANTS, AS PESTICIDES OR AS HERBICIDES; PEST REPELLANTS OR ATTRACTANTS; PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS
    • A01N47/00—Biocides, pest repellants or attractants, or plant growth regulators containing organic compounds containing a carbon atom not being member of a ring and having no bond to a carbon or hydrogen atom, e.g. derivatives of carbonic acid
    • A01N47/40—Biocides, pest repellants or attractants, or plant growth regulators containing organic compounds containing a carbon atom not being member of a ring and having no bond to a carbon or hydrogen atom, e.g. derivatives of carbonic acid the carbon atom having a double or triple bond to nitrogen, e.g. cyanates, cyanamides
    • A01N47/42—Biocides, pest repellants or attractants, or plant growth regulators containing organic compounds containing a carbon atom not being member of a ring and having no bond to a carbon or hydrogen atom, e.g. derivatives of carbonic acid the carbon atom having a double or triple bond to nitrogen, e.g. cyanates, cyanamides containing —N=CX2 groups, e.g. isothiourea
    • A01N47/44—Guanidine; Derivatives thereof
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61K—PREPARATIONS FOR MEDICAL, DENTAL OR TOILETRY PURPOSES
    • A61K31/00—Medicinal preparations containing organic active ingredients
    • A61K31/075—Ethers or acetals
    • A61K31/085—Ethers or acetals having an ether linkage to aromatic ring nuclear carbon
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61K—PREPARATIONS FOR MEDICAL, DENTAL OR TOILETRY PURPOSES
    • A61K31/00—Medicinal preparations containing organic active ingredients
    • A61K31/13—Amines
    • A61K31/155—Amidines (), e.g. guanidine (H2N—C(=NH)—NH2), isourea (N=C(OH)—NH2), isothiourea (—N=C(SH)—NH2)
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61K—PREPARATIONS FOR MEDICAL, DENTAL OR TOILETRY PURPOSES
    • A61K31/00—Medicinal preparations containing organic active ingredients
    • A61K31/21—Esters, e.g. nitroglycerine, selenocyanates
    • A61K31/215—Esters, e.g. nitroglycerine, selenocyanates of carboxylic acids
    • A61K31/22—Esters, e.g. nitroglycerine, selenocyanates of carboxylic acids of acyclic acids, e.g. pravastatin
    • A61K31/23—Esters, e.g. nitroglycerine, selenocyanates of carboxylic acids of acyclic acids, e.g. pravastatin of acids having a carboxyl group bound to a chain of seven or more carbon atoms
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61P—SPECIFIC THERAPEUTIC ACTIVITY OF CHEMICAL COMPOUNDS OR MEDICINAL PREPARATIONS
    • A61P17/00—Drugs for dermatological disorders
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61P—SPECIFIC THERAPEUTIC ACTIVITY OF CHEMICAL COMPOUNDS OR MEDICINAL PREPARATIONS
    • A61P31/00—Antiinfectives, i.e. antibiotics, antiseptics, chemotherapeutics
    • A61P31/02—Local antiseptics
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61P—SPECIFIC THERAPEUTIC ACTIVITY OF CHEMICAL COMPOUNDS OR MEDICINAL PREPARATIONS
    • A61P31/00—Antiinfectives, i.e. antibiotics, antiseptics, chemotherapeutics
    • A61P31/04—Antibacterial agents

Abstract

Antiseptic hand rub composition comprising at least 0.2% w/w of isopropyl myristate, free from other derivatives of myristic acid. Phenoxyethanol is preferably present in the composition at a concentration of 1% by wt or less. A glycol may also be present, such as dipropylene glycol if the composition is an ethanol based hand rub gel or propylene glycol if the composition is in the form of an emulsion or dispersion. Additional biocides such as triclosan and chlorhexidine gluconate may be included.

Description

NON-PILLING ANTISEPTIC HAND RUB COMPOSITIONS COMPRISING PHENOXYETHANOL AND
ISOPROPYL MYRISTATE AS AN ANTIPILLING AGENT
BACKGROUND
The use of alcohol as an antimicrobial dates to biblical times and earlier.
Alcohol¨containing antimicrobial compositions have been widely used in hospitals since at least the 1990's. In 1993, Bruch et al (US
5,403,864) stated:-Infection control and epidemiology experts have repeatedly emphasized that the single most important element in reducing the spread of infection is hand washing because a common method of transfer among individuals in the health care environment is with the hands. This fact has been painfully demonstrated in the analysis of epidemic spread.
However obvious and simple this may seem, medical care personnel, including physicians and nurses, are reluctant to wash or scrub their hands as frequently as required by their own protocols. It is estimated that the average time of washing between patients is 10 sec or less. The effectiveness of soap-and-water washing is measured in terms of minutes. Most simply do not wash frequently enough...
When a health care worker handles equipment or patients, bacteria which are not a part of the normal skin flora are picked up and adhere loosely to the topmost skin layer, the stratum comeum."
These statements remain as true in 2012 as when written in 1993. However in the intervening 20 years, new and improved antimicrobial preparations have been developed and the significance of two additional facts has become apparent. Firstly, some microorganisms may reside more deeply in sub corneum strata.
Secondly, the major reason for non-compliance with protocols is drying and chapping of the hands and skin irritation caused by repeated use of alcoholic rubs or water based antiseptic washes. Attempts to minimize irritation by inclusion of emollients have not been effective at increasing compliance either (i) because the emollients contributed to a feeling of greasiness after use or (ii) because they reduced the speed with which the hand wash was effective, or (iii) at the concentrations required, the emollients were ineffective at skin irritation reduction or for a combination of these three reasons.
In 1995 Bruch et al disclosed an antimicrobial composition comprising Triclosan, chloroxyphenol and an alcohol but this composition was not effective against subcutaneous organisms and although the inventors claimed that no signs of irritation were exhibited after multiple uses in the laboratory, many cases of skin irritation were exhibited in hospital use.
In 1998 Jampani et al (US 6,022,551) noted a need for an antimicrobial composition that is effective while also being non-irritating to users, and described a composition containing specific thickeners, and phospholipids The present Inventors have found that subjective feel of the composition also plays an important role in compliance, irrespective of other factors, and it is not sufficient for a composition to be "non-irritating".
Date Recue/Date Received 2020-08-11
- 2 -Thus, staff who may have to apply compositions to their hands as frequently as 100 times a day if they are to fully comply with protocols have been found to have a much higher compliance rate if using preparations which they judge to feel good, than if using preparations which they do not judge to feel good, or which they judge to feel inferior to other preparations they have used which they judge to feel better.
One of the factors influencing feel is the tendency to pill exhibited by some alcoholic gel preparations, but other factors include greasiness, and other subjective factors which play a major role in affecting how the composition feels when used and hence compliance rates.. Preparations which are generally judged by staff in use to feel superior to prior art preparations are herein referred to as having "improved feel" One Internationally accepted benchmark for biocidal efficacy is that a specified dose of an antiseptic .. composition left in contact with the hands for a specified time is required to produce at least the same biocidal efficacy as 6 ml of 60% v/v isopropyl alcohol with 60 secs contact time. (The test method is fully described in European Standard EN 1500:1997, entitled 'Chemical disinfectants and antiseptics Hygienic Handrub ¨ Test method and requirements (phase 2/step2)' against E. coli NCTC
10538.herinafter referred to as "EN1500:1997") Compositions for use as antiseptic hand rubs have contained materials added to "improve skin conditioning" and moisturization e.g. humectants such as glycerine, anti-inflammatories such as isolene, and anchoring agents /conditioners such as phenyldimethicone quaternary compounds. However skin "conditioners" are intended to affect the moisturization, emolliency and condition of the skin, in order to reduce irritation, rather than to affect the feel of the composition on the skin.
Any discussion of the prior art throughout the specification should in no way be considered as an admission that such prior art is widely known or forms part of common general knowledge in the field.
OBJECT OF THE INVENTION
It is an object of the present invention to overcome or ameliorate at least one of the disadvantages of the prior art, or to provide a useful alternative.
More particularly, it is an object of the present invention to provide an antiseptic handrub or handwash which avoids or ameliorates at least some of the above discussed disadvantages of prior art and which in preferred embodiments produces at least the same biocidal efficacy as is produced by hand rubbing with 6m1 of 60% v/v isopropyl alcohol in 60 seconds, but does so with improved skin feel.
Preferred embodiments are suitable for repeated use by health care personnel when moving from patient to patient or procedure to procedure with the same patient and comply with the internationally accepted standard for efficacy.
The use of preferred embodiments promotes improved compliance with antiseptic protocols.
Date Re9ue/Date Received 2020-06-05
- 3 -BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE INVENTION
According to a first aspect, the invention consists in an antiseptic hand rub composition which when used at a rate of less than 6m1 of composition for up to 60 seconds produces a level of biocidal efficacy equal to or greater than that produced by 6m1 of 60% v/v aqueous isopropyl alcohol in 60 secs (as measured according to the test method of EN1500:1997), said composition characterised in that it comprises at least 0.2% w/w of isopropyl myristate.
Isopropyl myristate is the isopropyl ester of myristic acid (linear C14 saturated acid), having the following structure:
In one preferred embodiment according to the first aspect, handrubbing with only 3m1 of an ethanol based antiseptic hand rub gel composition produces in 30 seconds at least the same biocidal efficacy as is produced by hand rubbing with 6m1 of 60% v/v isopropyl alcohol in 60 seconds (as measured according to the test method of EN1500:1997). Because preferred embodiments provide the same or greater biocidal efficacy with half the quantity of the preparation and in half the time, this together with the improved feel of compositions according to the invention, greatly enhances compliance with handrubbing protocols. Since ethanol is inferior in biocidal efficacy to isopropanol it is surprising that an ethanol based antiseptic gel is as efficacious.
Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, throughout the description and the claims, the words "comprise", "comprising", and the like are to be construed in an inclusive sense as opposed to an exclusive or exhaustive sense; that is to say, in the sense of "including, but not limited to".
In one preferred embodiment of the first aspect of the invention, the antiseptic hand rub composition is an ethanol based antiseptic hand rub composition that may comprise one or more glycols (preferably dipropylene glycol), or phenoxyethanol, or both a glycol and phenoxyethanol.
In one preferred embodiment the antiseptic is an ethanol based hand rub composition in the form of a gel.
In an alternative preferred embodiment of the first aspect of the invention, the antiseptic hand rub composition is in the form of an emulsion or dispersion that may comprise one or more glycols, of which at least one is a low molecular weight glycol (preferably propylene glycol), or phenoxyethanol, or both a glycol and phenoxyethanol.
Preferably the isopropyl myristate acts as an antipilling agent.
For preference, the isopropyl myristate is the only derivative of myristic acid present in the composition, that is, the composition is specifically free from all other esters, salts or derivatives of myristic acid such Date Re9ue/Date Received 2020-06-05
- 4 -as ethyl myristate or butyl myristate, or sodium myristate, myristamide, myristyl aldehyde, myristamide DEA etc.
The isopropyl myristate acts as an anti-pilling agent and improves the feel of the composition on the skin.
The present inventors have surprisingly found that inclusion of at least 0.2%
w/w isopropyl myristate in alcoholic hand rubs containing glycol and phenoxyethanol (both gels and water based emulsions), significantly improves the feel otherwise produced by the same and similar compositions omitting the isopropyl myristate. Even more surprisingly, the selection of isopropyl myristate (a C14 ester) as an antipilling agent produces benefits including skin feel not obtained with the C12 or C14 isopropyl esters and also not obtained with the C16 or C18 isopropyl esters, or with other myristates.
For instance, the same highly desirable feel is not obtained by substituting the C10 isopropyl ester, isopropyl caproate (decanoate) or the C12 isopropyl ester, isopropyl laurate (dodecanoate), nor is it obtained by substituting the C16 ester isopropyl palmitate or the C18 ester isopropyl stearate. Nor by substituting other similar compositions such myristyl myristate for the isopropyl myristate Preferably the alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition is substantially free from C10, C12, C16 or C18 isopropyl esters, i.e. free from isopropyl caproate (C10), isopropyl laurate (C12), isopropyl palmitate C16 and isopropyl stearate (C18). By substantially free is meant that the isopropyl myristate is at least 90%
pure C14) Preferably the isopropyl myristate is present in an amount of 0.1-2.0% w/w.
More preferably, it may be present in an amount of 0.2-0.8% w/w, or more preferably still 0.2 - 0.5% w/w or 0.2 ¨ 0.3% w/w.
Preferably if the alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition is a gel then the isopropyl myristate is present in an amount of around 0.2%.
In another embodiment the invention provides a method of improving the skin feel of an ethanol based antiseptic hand rub composition which produces a level of biocidal efficacy equal to or greater than that produced by hand rubbing with 6m1 of 60% v/v isopropyl alcohol in 60 seconds (as measured in accord with EN1500:1997) applying less than 6m1 of such handrub for up to 60 seconds, said method comprising the step of incorporating at least 0.2% w/w of isopropyl myristate in the composition.
The alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition may comprise a glycol, or phenoxyethanol or a glycol and up to 1% by wt of phenoxyethanol. In preferred embodiments it may be in the form of a gel or an emulsion or suspension.
Preferably the isopropyl myristate is added as an antipilling agent.
Preferably the isopropyl myristate is selected as the only derivative of myristic acid present in the composition and the method avoids the use of a formulation containing C10, C12, C16 or C18 isopropyl esters, i.e. the method of improving the skin feel avoids the use of isopropyl caproate (C10), isopropyl laurate (C12), isopropyl palmitate C16 and isopropyl stearate (C18).
Date Re9ue/Date Received 2020-06-05
- 5 -In another aspect, the invention provides an antiseptic hand rub composition characterised in that it comprises at least 0.2% w/w of isopropyl myristate. Preferably the composition is free from any of isopropyl caproate, isopropyl laurate, isopropyl palmitate and isopropyl stearate. Preferably, isopropyl myristate is the only derivative of myristic acid present in the composition.
Preferably the isopropyl myristate is present in a concentration of from 0.2%
to 0.5%
Preferably, the composition comprises phenoxyethanol. The phenoxyethanol is preferably present in a concentration of 1% by wt or less.
The composition is preferably in the form of an ethanol based hand rub or in the form of an emulsion or dispersion.
The composition preferably contains one or moreglycols.
In one preferred embodiment, the composition is an ethanol based hand rub gel, in which case the glycol is preferably dipropylene glycol. The dipropylene glycol is preferably present in an amount of from 0.25 to 4 times the amount by wt of isopropyl myristate. Preferably the dipropylene glycol is present in an amount of up to 1% by wt of the composition.
In one particularly preferred embodiment of the present invention, the invention provides a formulation comprising: ethanol, phenoxyethanol, a glycol and isopropyl myristate; and free from any other myristic acid derivative. The formulation is free from any other myristic acid derivative.
The amount of ethanol is preferably 50-80% w/w, more preferably ethanol 60-65 w/w%; the amount of dipropylene glycol is preferably 0.2-0.8% w/w, more preferably 0A-0.6% w/w;
the amount of phenoxyethanol is preferably 0.2-up to 1.0% w/w, more preferably 0.5-0.6% w/w;
and the amount of isopropyl myristate is preferably 0.1 to 0.3, more preferably around 0.2% w/w.
In an alternative preferred embodiment, the composition is in the form of an emulsion or dispersion in which case at least one of the glycols is a low molecular weight glycol.
preferably propylene glycol. The propylene glycol is preferably present in an amount of from 0.25 to 4 times the amount by wt of isopropyl myristate. Preferably the propylene glycol is present in an amount of up to 1%
by wt of the composition.
The antiseptic compositions may include one or more additional biocides.
Preferred additional biocides are triclosan and chlorhexidine gluconate.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition which when used at a rate of less than 6m1 of composition for up to 60 seconds produces a level of biocidal efficacy equal to or greater than that produced by 6m1 of 60% v/v aqueous isopropyl alcohol in 60 secs as measured according to the test method of EN1500:1997, said composition Date Re9ue/Date Received 2020-06-05 - 5a -characterised in that it comprises 0.2% w/w to 0.5% w/w of isopropyl myristate as an antipilling agent and phenoxyethanol.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition described herein which is alcoholic and produces substantially the same or better level of biocidal efficacy by hand rubbing for 30 seconds using 3m! of the composition as is obtained using 6m1 of 60% v/v isopropyl alcohol in 60 seconds as measured according to the test method of EN1500:1997.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein in the form of an ethanol based antiseptic hand rub composition.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein free from isopropyl caproate, isopropyl laurate, isopropyl palmitate and isopropyl stearate.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein wherein isopropyl myristate is the only derivative of myristic acid present in the composition.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein further comprising a glycol.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein comprising dipropylene glycol.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein wherein the glycol is or includes dipropylene glycol in a concentration of from 0.25 to 4 times the concentration by wt of isopropyl myristate.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein wherein the composition comprises phenoxyethanol at a concentration of 1% or less by wt.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein in the form of an alcoholic gel.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein in the form of an emulsion or dispersion.
Date Re9ue/Date Received 2020-06-05 - 5b -In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein free from isopropyl caproate, isopropyl laurate, isopropyl palmitate and isopropyl stearate.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein wherein isopropyl myristate is the only derivative of myristic acid present in the composition.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein further comprising one or more glycols.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein wherein at least one of the glycols is a low molecular weight glycol.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein wherein the low molecular weight glycol is propylene glycol.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a non-pilling alcoholic antiseptic hand rub composition described herein wherein the composition comprises phenoxyethanol at a concentration of 1% by wt or less.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a method of improving the skin feel of an antiseptic hand rub composition which produces a level of biocidal efficacy equal to or greater than that produced by hand rubbing with 6m1 of 60% v/v isopropyl alcohol in 60 seconds, said method comprising the step of adding to the hand rub 0.2% w/w to 0.5% w/w of isopropyl myristate as an antipilling agent and phenoxyethanol.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a method described herein wherein the hand rub further comprises one or more glycols.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a method described herein wherein the glycol is or includes dipropylene glycol in a concentration of from 0.25 to 4 times the concentration by wt of isopropyl myristate.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a method described herein wherein the hand rub is in the form of an alcoholic gel.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a method described herein wherein the hand rub is in the form of an emulsion.
Date Re9ue/Date Received 2020-06-05 - 5c -In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a method described herein wherein the isopropyl myristate is the only derivative of myristic acid present in the composition.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a method described herein wherein the isopropyl myristate is free from isopropyl caproate, isopropyl laurate, isopropyl palmitate and isopropyl stea rate.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a use of 0.2% w/w to 0.5% w/w of isopropyl myristate as an antipilling agent and phenoxyethanol for improving the skin feel of an antiseptic hand rub composition which produces a level of biocidal efficacy equal to or greater than that produced by hand rubbing with 6m1 of 60% v/v isopropyl alcohol in 60 seconds.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a use described herein wherein the hand rub further comprises one or more glycols.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a use described herein wherein the glycol is or includes dipropylene glycol in a concentration of from 0.25 to 4 times the concentration by wt of isopropyl myristate.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a use described herein wherein the hand rub is in the form of an alcoholic gel.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a use described herein wherein the hand rub is in the form of an emulsion.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a use described herein wherein the isopropyl myristate is the only derivative of myristic acid present in the composition.
In illustrative embodiments of the present invention, there is provided a use described herein wherein the isopropyl myristate is free from isopropyl caproate, isopropyl laurate, isopropyl palmitate and isopropyl stea rate.
Date Re9ue/Date Received 2020-06-05
- 6 -DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS OF INVENTION
The formulations in examples 1 to 8 were prepared. Each formulation contains from 0.2to 0.5%w/w of isopropyl myristate. Examples 1 to 5 below exemplify alcohol based handrub gels according to the invention. Examples 6 to 8 below exemplify water based emulsions or dispersions.
Example 1: (70% v/v Ethanol, CHG 0.5%w/w antiseptic gel):
Ethanol 62.00%w/w Chlorhexidine gluconate 0.50%w/w Hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose 0.50%w/w Glycerol 0.50%w/w Quarternium-80 0.05%w/w Phenoxyethanol 1.0%w/w Isopropyl myristate 0.2%w/w Fragrance 0.10%w/w Aminomethylpropanol 0.02%w/w Lactic acid 0.05%w/w Red No. 33 q.s as required Deionised water q.s to 100.
Example 2: (70%v/v Ethanol, Triclosan 1.0%w/w antiseptic gel) Ethanol 62.00%w/w Triclosan 1.00%w/w CarbopolTM 0.40%w/w Glycerol 0.50%w/w Propylene glycol 0.50%w/w Isopropyl myristate 0.20%w/w Quarternium-80 0.05%w/w Phenoxyethanol 1.00%w/w Fragrance q.s as required Aminomethylpropanol q.s as required FD&C Green no3 q.s as required Deionised water q.s to 100.
Example 3: (70% v/v Ethanol antiseptic gel") Ethanol 62.00%w/w CarbopolTM 0.30%w/w Dipropylene glycol 0.50%w/w Isopropyl myristate 0.20%w/w Phenoxyethanol 0.55%w/w Fragrance q.s as required Date Re9ue/Date Received 2020-06-05
- 7 -Aminomethylpropanol q.s as required Dye stuff q.s as required Example 4: (70% v/v Ethanol antiseptic gel") Ethanol 62.00%w/w CarbopolTM 0.35%w/w Glycerol 0.50%w/w Dipropylene glycol 0.50%w/w Isopropyl myristate 0.20%w/w Quarternium 80 0.05%w/w Phenoxyethanol 0.50%w/w Fragrance q.s as required Aminomethylpropanol q.s as required FD&C Blue No. 1 q.s as required FD&C Yellow No. 5 q.s as required Deionised water q.s to 100 Example 5: (70% v/v Ethanol, CHG 2.0% w/w surgical gel) Ethanol 62.00%w/w Chlorhexidine gluconate 2.00%w/w Hydroxy propyl methyl cellulose 0.30%w/w Glycerol 0.50%w/w Phenoxyethanol 1.00%w/w Isopropyl myristate 0.20%w/w Aminomethyl propanol q.s as required Lactic acid q.s as required Red No. 33 q.s as required Deionised water q.s to 100.
Examples 6-8 below are water based antiseptic emulsions or dispersions Example 6: (CHG 1% w/w antiseptic lotion) Chlorhexidine gluconate 1.00%w/w Cetostearayl alcohol 2.50%w/w Cetyl palmitate 0.50%w/w Ceteareth 20 0.60%w/w POE-40 hydrogenated castor oil 0.20%w/w Polyethylen glycol-4000 2.70%w/w Glyceryl stea rate 0.50%w/w Date Re9ue/Date Received 2020-06-05
- 8 -PEG-100 stearate 0.50%w/w Sorbitan monostearate 0.70%w/w Paraffin oil 4.00%w/w Isopropyl myristate 0.50%w/w Phenoxyethanol 1.00%w/w Ethanol 5.00%w/w Propylene glycol 0.50%w/w PEG-150/ stearyl alcohol/ SMDI copolymer 4.00%w/w Barium sulphate 2.00%w/w Quarternium 80 0.20%w/w Fragrance 0.05%w/w Deionised water q.s to 100.
Example 7 (CHG 2% w/w surgical lotion) Chlorhexidine gluconate 2.00%w/w Cetosterayl alcohol 1.80%w/w Cetyl palmitate 0.50%w/w Ceteareth 20 0.60%w/w POE-40 hydrogenated castor oil 0.20%w/w Polyethylen glycol-4000 1.80%w/w Glyceryl stearate 0.40%w/w PEG-100 stearate 0.40%w/w Sorbitan monostearate 0.40%w/w Paraffin oil 3.0%w/w Isopropyl myristate 1.00%w/w Phenoxyethanol 1.00%w/w Ethanol 10.00%w/w Propylene glycol 0.50%w/w PEG-150/stearyl alcohol/SMDI copolymer 2.00%w/w Barium sulphate 2.00%w/w Quarternium 80 0.20%w/w Deionised water q.s to 100.
Example 8: (Triclosan 0.5% w/w antiseptic lotion) Triclosan 0.50%w/w Cetosterayl alcohol 2.50%w/w Cetyl palmitate 0.50%w/w Ceteareth 20 0.60%w/w POE-40 hydrogenated castor oil 0.20%w/w
- 9 -Polyethylen glycol-4000 2.70%w/w Glyceryl stearate 0.50%w/w PEG-100 stearate 0.50%w/w Sorbitan monostearate 0.70%w/w Paraffin oil 4.00%w/w Isopropyl myristate 0.50%w/w Phenoxyethanol 1.00%w/w Chlorhexidine gluconate 0.20%w/w Ethanol 5.00%w/w Propylene glycol 0.50%w/w Povidone 0.20%w/w PEG-150/ stearyl alcohol/ SMDI copolymer 2.00%w/w Barium sulphate 2.00`Yow/w Quarternium 80 0.20%w/w Fragrance 0.05%w/w Deionised water q.s to 100.
METHOD- part 1 Tests A. B. C¨Relatinq to ethanol based antiseptic hand rub dels Comparative tests as to skin feel were conducted as follows:
Various alcoholic gel antiseptic formulations based on Example 3 were prepared with the isopropyl myristate removed from the formulation which was otherwise left intact and various isopropyl esters, myristyl myristate, glycerol laurate ¨ all of which are considered to be emollients. These and a market leading alcoholic gel antiseptic were compared by an experienced panel for their skin feel after repeated usage.
A. The ethanol antiseptic gel formula described in Example 3 above was used to prepare skin feel test formulations as follows:
1. Omitting the isopropyl myristate without replacement.
2. Omitting the isopropyl myristate; replacing the isopropyl myristate in Example 3 with the C10 Isopropyl ester.
3. Omitting the isopropyl myristate; replacing the isopropyl myristate in Example 3 with the C12 Isopropyl ester.
4. Incorporating isopropyl myristate.
5. Omitting the isopropyl myristate; replacing the isopropyl myristate in Example 3 with the C16 Isopropyl ester.
6. Omitting the isopropyl myristate; replacing the isopropyl myristate in Example 3 with the C18 Isopropyl ester.
7. Omitting the isopropyl myristate; replacing the isopropyl myristate in Example 3 with myristyl myristate.
-10-8. Omitting the isopropyl myristate; replacing the isopropyl myristate in Example 3 with glyceryl laurate.
9. Alcoholic hand rub "Anger from Johnson and Johnson.
B. Various Levels of isopropyl myristate. The ethanol antiseptic gel formula described in Example 3 above was used to prepare skin feel test formulations as follows:
1. The formulation without isopropyl myristate.
2. The formulation with 0.1%w/w isopropyl myristate.
3. The formulation with 0.2%w/w isopropyl myristate.
4. The formulation with 0.35%w/w isopropyl myristate.
5. The formulation with 0.5%w/w isopropyl myristate.
6. The formulation with 0.8%w/w isopropyl myristate.
C. Various Levels of glycol, in this case dipropylene glycol (DPG) were added to Example 3 which otherwise was unchanged and these assessed for skin feel. The levels of dipropylene glycol(DPG) added to Example 3 were:
1. The formulation with 0.1%w/w Dipropylene glycol 2. The formulation with 0.5%w/w Dipropylene glycol 3. The formulation with 0.8%w/w Dipropylene glycol 4. The formulation with 1.0%w/w Dipropylene glycol 5. The formulation with 1.3%w/w Dipropylene glycol The hands were first washed with antiseptic handwash following standard hospital handwash procedure and dried with paper towels and then allowed to dry for 5 minutes. 3 ml of the respective test product was then applied to both hands and rubbed until dry. After a further minute skin feel was noted. After 5 minutes from the first application, a second application of the test product was applied to both hands and the test procedure was repeated. This sequence was repeated until 4 further 3m1 applications had been made with 5 minute intervals between each. The skin feel and pilling were both noted 1 minute after the hands were rubbed dry after the 5111 application.
The tests were conducted with a panel of 10 experienced staff on 3 occasions, each at a different site.
The results were as follows: "IPM" refers to isopropyl myristate. "DPG" refers to dipropylene glycol.
The respondents were able to choose from a limited number of descriptive results with a sufficient range of choices to encompass the full spectrum of possible results. The respondents were asked to classify the feel as "light" or "heavy" and to classify the feel as one or more of "dry" or "smooth" or "waxy", "greasy" or "oily". In the results columns the number of respondents providing the predominant skin feel result ("res") were noted.
- 11 -METHOD-part 2 Tests D, E, F relating to antiseptic handrub emulsions/suspensions Various aqueous emulsion (lotion) antiseptic formulations were prepared with the isopropyl myristate removed from the formulation which was otherwise left intact and various Isopropyl esters, myristyl myristate, glycerol laurate ¨ all of which are considered to be emollients.
These were compared by an experienced panel for their skin feel after repeated usage.
D. The aqueous antiseptic emulsion formula described in Example 8 above was used to prepare skin feel test formulations as follows:
1. Omitting the isopropyl myristate without replacement.
2. Omitting the isopropyl myristate; replacing the Isopropyl myristate in Example 8 with the C10 isopropyl ester.
3. Omitting the isopropyl myristate; replacing the Isopropyl myristate in Example 8 with the C12 isopropyl ester.
4. Incorporating isopropyl myristate.
5. Omitting the isopropyl myristate; replacing the Isopropyl myristate in Example 8 with the C16 Isopropyl ester.
6. Omitting the isopropyl myristate; replacing the Isopropyl myristate in Example 8 with the C18 Isopropyl ester.
7. Omitting the isopropyl myristate; replacing the Isopropyl myristate in Example 8 with myristyl myristate.
8. Omitting the isopropyl myristate; replacing the Isopropyl myristate in Example 8 with glyceryl laurate.
E. Various Levels of Isopropyl Myristate:
The aqueous antiseptic emulsion formula described in Example 8 above was used to prepare skin feel test formulations as follows:
1. The formulation without isopropyl myristate.
2. The formulation with 0.2%w/w isopropyl myristate.
3. The formulation with 0.5%w/w isopropyl myristate.
4. The formulation with 0.8%w/w isopropyl myristate.
5. The formulation with 1.0%w/w isopropyl myristate.
6. The formulation with 1.3%w/w isopropyl myristate.
F Various Levels of Glycol, in this case propylene glycol (PG), were added to Example 8 which otherwise was unchanged and these assessed for skin feel:
1. The formulation with 0.2`)/ow/w propylene glycol.
2. The formulation with 0.5%w/w propylene glycol.
3. The formulation with 0.8%w/w propylene glycol.
- 12 -4. The formulation with 1.0 70w/w propylene glycol.
5. The formulation with 1.3%w/w propylene glycol.
The hands were first washed with antiseptic handwash following standard hospital handwash procedure and dried with paper towels and then allowed to dry for 5 minutes. 4 ml of the respective test product was then applied to both hands and rubbed until dry. After a further minute skin feel was noted. After 5 minutes from the first application, a second application of the test product was applied to both hands and the test procedure was repeated. This sequence was repeated until 2 further 4m1 applications had been made with 5 minute intervals between each. The skin feel was both noted 1 minute after the hands were rubbed dry after the 3rd application.
The tests were conducted with a panel of 10 experienced staff on 3 occasions, each at a different site.
The results were as follows: "IPM" refers to isopropyl myristate "PG" refers to propylene glycol.
In the results columns the number of respondents providing the predominant skin feel result were noted.
The respondents were able to choose from a limited number of descriptive results with a sufficient range of choices to encompass the full spectrum of possible results.
RESULTS- part 1 Tests A, B, C¨Relating to ethanol based antiseptic hand rub gels Tests to date have shown that the biocidal efficacy of compositions according to the invention was not adversely affected by inclusion of isopropyl myristate (IPM) in amounts of up to at least 1 w/w.
For example, an alcoholic hand rub according to example 3 of the invention complies with the requirements of the European standard test with a log reduction of 3.29 after 30 seconds rubbing with 3 mL of product compared to the reference product, 6 mL (60cYov/v Propan-2-ol) for 60 seconds contact time with a log reduction of 3.33. (a difference in log reduction of no statistical significance despite the difference in quantity and time) Table -1 Results from Test A, Site 1 Effect of various isopropyl esters on Skin Feel in comparison with market leading product After 1st Res. After 5th Res. Pilling Res. Rank Application Application Example 3 without Light, Dry 7/10 Light, Very Dry 8/10 Pilling a lot 9/10 IPM
Example 3 with IPM Light, smooth 6/10 Soft, Smooth 8/10 No Pilling 8/10 (C14) Example 3 with C10 Light, Dry 8/10 Light, Very Dry 7/10 Pilling a bit 8/10 2 Example 3 with C12 Light, Dry 7/10 Light, Dry 6/10 Pilling a bit 7/10 2 Example 3 with C16 Heavy, Waxy 8/10 Heavy, Waxy 8/10 No Pilling 7/10 3
- 13 -Example 3 with C18 Heavy, Waxy 7/10 Heavy, Oily & 9/10 No Pilling 8/10 4 Waxy Example 3 with Heavy, Waxy 7/10 Heavy, Waxy 6/10 No Pilling 7/10 Myristyl Myristate Example 3 with Heavy, 7/10 Heavy, Greasy 8/10 No Pilling Glyceryl Lau rate Greasy Example with Light, smooth, 8/10 Greasy, Very 7/10 Pilling a lot 9/10 8 "Anger Oily Oily From the results of above Table 1 it has been concluded that:
1. After repeated cycles of use the composition incorporating isopropyl myristate produced skin feel preferred to that produced by any of the other Isopropyl ester containing compositions tested.
2. After repeated cycles of use the composition incorporating isopropyl myristate produced the preferred combination of skin feel in combination with minimal pilling than the other compositions tested.
Table 2 Test B ¨ Site 1 Effect of IPM concentration on Skin Feel After 1st No. After 518 No.
Pilling No. Rank Application Application Example 3 without Light, Dry 7/10 Light, Very Dry 8/10 Pilling a lot 9/10 IPM
Example 3 with 0.1% Light, Very 8/10 Light, Dry 8/10 Pilling a bit 9/10 IPM Dry Example 3 with 0.2% Light, Smooth 6/10 Soft, Smooth 8/10 No Pilling IPM
Example 3 with Light, Smooth 9/10 Soft, Smooth, 6/10 No Pilling 9/10 0.35% IPM Oily Example 3 with 0.5% Soft, Smooth 6/10 Soft, Oily 8/10 No Pilling 8/10 IPM
Example 3 with 0.8% Soft, Smooth 8/10 Heavy, Oily 9/10 No Pilling 9/10 IPM
From the results of above Table 2 it has been concluded that:
Of the various levels of isopropyl myristate added to the composition, after repeated cycles of use, the test subjects preferred the compositions incorporating isopropyl myristate at levels of 0.2%, 0.35% and 0.5%. Of these the level of 0.2% was somewhat preferred over the levels of 0.35% and 0.5%.
- 14 -Table 3 Test C ¨ Site 1 Effect of Dipropylene glycol concentration on Skin Feel After 1s! No. After 5111 No. Pilling No.
Rank Application Application Example 3 with 0.2% Light, Very 7/10 Light, Dry 8/10 Pilling a bit -- 8/10 -- 5 DPG and 0.2% IPM Dry Example 3 with 0.5% Light, Smooth 6/10 Soft, Smooth 8/10 No Pilling DPG and 0.2% IPM
Example 3 with 0.8% Light, Smooth 6/10 Soft, Smooth 8/10 No Pilling DPG and 0.2% IPM
Example 3 with 1% Light, Smooth 7/10 Soft, Tacky 7/10 No Pilling DPG and 0.2% IPM
Example 3 with 1.3% Light, Tacky 6/10 Heavy, Tacky 8/10 No Pilling -- 9/10 -- 4 DPG and 0.2% IPM
From the results of above Table 3 it has been concluded that:
Of the various levels of dipropylene glycol added to the composition, after repeated cycles of use, the test subjects preferred the compositions incorporating dipropylene glycol at levels of 0.5%, 0.8% and 1.0%. Of these the level of 0.5% was somewhat preferred over the levels of 0.8% and 1.0%.
Table 4 Results from Test A, Site 2 Effect of various isopropyl esters on Skin Feel in comparison with market leading product After 1st No. After 5th No. Pilling No.
Rank Application Application Example 3 without Light, Dry 9/10 Light, Very Dry 8/10 Pilling a lot IPM
Example 3 with IPM Light, smooth 8/10 Soft, Smooth 9/10 No Pilling 8/10 (C14) Example 3 with C10 Light, Dry 7/10 Light, Dry 7/10 Pilling a bit 6/10 2 Example 3 with C12 Light, Dry 8/10 Light, Dry 6/10 Pilling a bit 7/10 3 Example 3 with C16 Heavy, Oily 9/10 Heavy, Oily 9/10 No Pilling 8/10 3 Example 3 with C18 Heavy, Waxy 8/10 Heavy, Oily & 8/10 No Pilling 7/10 Waxy Example 3 with Heavy, Waxy 7/10 Heavy, Waxy 7/10 No Pilling 8/10 Myristyl Myristate
- 15 -Example 3 with Heavy, Greasy 6/10 Heavy, Greasy 8/10 No Pilling 8/10 8 Glyceryl Laurate Example with Light, smooth, 9/10 Greasy, Very 8/10 Pilling a lot 9/10 8 "Anger Oily Oily From the results of above Table 4 it has been concluded that:
1. After repeated cycles of use the composition incorporating isopropyl myristate produced skin feel preferred to that produced by any of the other Isopropyl ester containing compositions tested.
2. After repeated cycles of use the composition incorporating isopropyl myristate produced the preferred combination of skin feel in combination with minimal pilling as compared to the other compositions tested.
Table 5 Test B, Site 2 Effect of IPM concentration on Skin Feel After 1st No. After 51" No. Pilling No.
Rank Application Application Example 3 without Light, Dry 9/10 Light, Very Dry 8/10 Pilling a lot 6/10 IPM
Example 3 with 0.1% Light, Very 8/10 Light, Dry 8/10 Pilling a bit 8/10 IPM Dry Example 3 with 0.2% Light, Smooth 8/10 Soft, Smooth 9/10 No Pilling IPM
Example 3 with Light, Smooth 8/10 Soft, Smooth, 6/10 Pilling a bit 7/10 0.35% IPM Oily Example 3 with 0.5% Soft, Smooth 7/10 Soft, Oily 8/10 No Pilling 6/10 IPM
Example 3 with 0.8% Soft, Smooth 7/10 Heavy, Oily 7/10 No Pilling 7/10 IPM
From the results of above Table 5 it has been concluded that:
Of the various levels of isopropyl myristate added to the composition, after repeated cycles of use the test subjects preferred the compositions incorporating isopropyl myristate at levels of 0.2%, 0.35% and 0.5%. Of these the level of 0.2% was somewhat preferred over the levels of 0.35% and 0.5%.
Table 6 Test C, Site 2 Effect of Dipropylene glycol concentration on Skin Feel
- 16 -After is! No. After 5th No. Pilling No. Rank Application Application Example 3 with 0.2% Light, Very 8/10 Light, Dry 8/10 Pilling a bit 7/10 DPG and 0.2% IPM Dry Example 3 with 0.5% Light, Smooth 8/10 Soft, Smooth 9/10 No Pilling DPG and 0.2% IPM
Example 3 with 0.8% Light, Smooth 6/10 Soft, Smooth 7/10 No Pilling DPG and 0.2% IPM
Example 3 with 1% Light, Smooth 8/10 Soft, Tacky 7/10 No Pilling DPG and 0.2% IPM
Example with 1.3% Light, Tacky 7/10 Heavy, Tacky 8/10 No Pilling DPG and 0.2% IPM
From the results of above Table 6 it has been concluded that:
Of the various levels of dipropylene glycol added to the composition, after repeated cycles of use the test subjects preferred the compositions incorporating dipropylene glycol at levels of 0.5%, 0.8% and 1.0%. Of these the level of 0.5% was somewhat preferred over the levels of 0.8% and 1.0%.
5 Table 7 Results from Test A, Site 3 Effect of various isopropyl esters on Skin Feel in comparison with market leading product After 1s1 No. After 519 No. ______ Pilling No. Rank Application Application Example 3 without Light, Dry 9/10 Light, Very Dry 8/10 Pilling a lot 9/10 IPM
Example 3 with IPM Light, smooth 8/10 Soft, Smooth 6/10 No Pilling 8/10 (C14) 1 Example 3 with C10 Light, Dry 7/10 Light, Very Dry 6/10 Pilling a bit 8/10 2 Example 3 with C12 Light, Dry 8/10 Light, Smooth 6/10 Pilling a bit 7/10 2 Example 3 with C16 Light, Smooth 9/10 Heavy, Oily 7/10 No Pilling 9/10 2 Example 3 with C18 Heavy, Waxy 6/10 Heavy, Oily 8/10 No Pilling 9/10 5 Example 3 with Heavy, Waxy 8/10 Heavy, Waxy 9/10 No Pilling 8/10 Myristyl Myristate Example 3 with Heavy, 7/10 Heavy, Greasy 6/10 No Pilling Glyceryl Laurate Greasy
- 17 -Example with Light, smooth, 9/10 Greasy, Very 8/10 Pilling a lot 9/10 "Anger Oily Oily From the results of above Table 7 it has been concluded that:
1. After repeated cycles of use the composition incorporating isopropyl myristate produced skin feel preferred to that produced by any of the other Isopropyl ester containing compositions tested.
2. After repeated cycles of use the composition incorporating isopropyl myristate produced the preferred combination of skin feel in combination with minimal pilling as compared to the other compositions tested.
Table 8 Test B, Site 3 Effect of IPM concentration on Skin Feel After 1st No. After 519 No. Pilling No.
Rank Application Application Example 3 without Light, Dry 9/10 Light, Very Dry 8/10 Pilling a lot 9/10 6 IPM
Example 3 with 0.1% Light, Very 8/10 Light, Dry 8/10 Pilling a bit 8/10 IPM Dry Example 3 with 0.2% Light, smooth 8/10 Soft, Smooth 6/10 No Pilling 8/10 1 IPM
Example 3 with Light, Smooth 8/10 Soft, Smooth, 6/10 Pilling a bit 7/10 0.35% IPM Oily Example 3 with 0.5% Soft, Smooth 8/10 Soft, Oily 9/10 No Pilling 8/10 IPM
Example 3 with 0.8% Soft, Smooth 7/10 Heavy, Oily 9/10 No Pilling 7/10 IPM
From the results of above Table 8 it has been concluded that:
Of the various levels of isopropyl myristate added to the composition, after repeated cycles of use the test subjects preferred the compositions incorporating isopropyl myristate at levels of 0.2%, 0.35% and 0.5%. Of these the level of 0.2% was somewhat preferred over the levels of 0.35% and 0.5%.
Table 9 Test C, Site 3 Effect of Dipropylene glycol concentration on Skin Feel After 1st No. After 5th No. Pilling No.
Rank
- 18 -Application Application Example 3 with 0.2% Light, Very 9/10 Light, Dry 8/10 Pilling a bit 7/10 5 DPG and 0.2% IPM Dry Example 3 with 0.5% Light, smooth 8/10 Soft, Smooth 6/10 No Pilling 8/10 DPG and 0.2% IPM
Example 3 with 0.8% Light, Smooth 7/10 Soft, Smooth 7/10 No Pilling DPG and 0.2% IPM
Example 3 with 1% Light, Smooth 8/10 Soft, Tacky 9/10 No Pilling DPG and 0.2% IPM
Example 3 with 1.3% Light, Tacky 7/10 Heavy, Tacky 9/10 No Pilling 9/10 4 DPG and 0.2% IPM
From the results of above Table 9 it has been concluded that:
Of the various levels of dipropylene glycol added to the composition, after repeated cycles of use the test subjects preferred the compositions incorporating dipropylene glycol at levels of 0.5%, 0.8% and 1.0%. Of these the level of 0.5% was somewhat preferred over the levels of 0.8% and 1.0%.
Consolidated Conclusions across the Tests A,B,C and Sites 1-3 It is notable that for Tests A, B and C the preferred compositions chosen by the panellists at each of the sites were the same. This consistency of results is indicative of the experience of the panellists and clearly discernible differences in the results.
Test A
The majority of panellists across the three sites agreed on the composition with the preferred emollient with respect to skin feel and pilling. Their clear choice was the formulation with isopropyl myristate.
Test B
The majority of panellists agreed that the feel of the formula with IPM was significantly better than that of any other tested formulation. This was the case not only after the first application but more so after repeated applications. Similar results were obtained with the other formulations exemplified and at a range of isopropyl myristate concentrations up to 0.5% w/w and the most preferred level of isopropyl myristate was 0.2%.
As will be understood by those skilled in the art the antiseptic compositions can be formulated using other components and in other concentrations without departing from the inventive concept herein disclosed of incorporating isopropyl myristate to improve the feel of the product and enhance its propensity to be used.
- 19 -Test C
As for Test A the majority of panellists agreed on a composition with a preferred level of dipropylene glycol with respect to skin feel and pilling. The results were consistent across the cycles of use. The preferred composition incorporated dipropylene glycol at a level of 0.5%.
.. RESULTS- part 2 Tests D, E, F Relating to antiseptic hand rub emulsions and dispersions The aqueous hand rub (lotion) according to the invention complies with the requirements of the European standard test with a log reduction of 3.77 after 60 seconds rubbing with 4 mL of product compared to the reference product, 6 mL (608)/ov/v propan-2-ol) for 60 seconds contact time with a log reduction of 4.04. (a difference in log reduction of no statistical significance despite the difference in quantity and time) Table 10. Results from Test D, Site 1 SKIN FEEL Comparison with various Isopropyl esters After 10t Res. After 3rd Res. Rank Application Application Example 8 without IPM Light, Dry 7/10 Light, Dry 7/10 3 Example 8 with IPM Light, Smooth 6/10 Soft, Smooth 7/10 1 (C14) Example 8 with Cl 0 Light, Dry 8/10 Light, Dry 8/10 3 Example 8 with C12 Light, Dry 7/10 Light, Smooth 8/10 2 Example 8 with C16 Heavy, 9/10 Heavy, Waxy 8/10 5 Smooth Example 8 with C18 Heavy, Waxy 7/10 Heavy, Oily & 7/10 5 Waxy Example 8 with Myristyl Heavy, Waxy 7/10 Heavy, Waxy 8/10 7 Myristate Example 8 with Glyceryl Heavy, Greasy 7/10 Heavy, Greasy 7/10 Lau rate From the above Table 10 results it has been concluded that:
After repeated cycles of use the composition incorporating isopropyl myristate produced skin feel preferred to that produced by any of the other isopropyl ester containing compositions tested.
Table 11. Results from Test D, Site 2 SKIN FEEL Comparison with various Isopropyl esters
- 20 -After 1st No. After 3rd No. Rank Application Application Example 8 without IPM Light, Dry 6/10 Light, Dry 8/10 4 Example 8 with IPM Light, Smooth 8/10 Soft, Smooth 7/10 1 (C14) Example 8 with C10 Light, Dry 7/10 Light, Dry 7/10 2 Example 8 with C12 Light, Dry 7/10 Light, Smooth 8/10 2 Example 8 with C16 Heavy, 8/10 Heavy, Waxy 6/10 5 Smooth Example 8 with C18 Heavy, Waxy 7/10 Heavy, Oily & 8/10 Waxy Example 8 with Myristyl Heavy, Waxy 7/10 Heavy, Waxy 9/10 7 Myristate Example 8 with Heavy, Greasy 7/10 Heavy, Greasy 7/10 7 Glyceryl Lau rate From the above Table 11 results it has been concluded that:
After repeated cycles of use the composition incorporating isopropyl myristate produced skin feel preferred to that produced by any of the other isopropyl ester containing compositions tested.
Table 12. Results from Test D. Site 3 SKIN FEEL Comparison with various Isopropyl esters After 1st No. After 318 No. Rank Application Application Example 8 without IPM Light, Dry 9/10 Light, Dry 8/10 2 Example 8 with IPM Light, Smooth 8/10 Soft, Smooth 8/10 1 (C14) Example 8 with C10 - Light, Dry 6/10 Light, Dry 7/102 2 Example 8 with C12 Light, Dry 7/10 Light, Smooth 7/10 4 Example 8 with C16 Heavy, 8/10 Heavy, Waxy 7/10 5 Smooth Example 8 with C18 Heavy, Waxy 7/10 Heavy, Oily & 7/10 Waxy
-21 -Example 8 with Myristyl Heavy, Waxy 7/10 Heavy, Waxy 8/10 Myristate Example 8 with Glyceryl Heavy, Greasy 7/10 Heavy, Greasy Lau rate From the above Table 12 results it has been concluded that:
After repeated cycles of use the composition incorporating isopropyl myristate produced skin feel preferred to that produced by any of the other isopropyl ester containing compositions tested.
Table 13. Test E ¨ Site 1 Effect on feel of varying IPM concentration After 121 No. After 31d No. Rank Application Application Example 8 without IPM Light, Dry 6/10 Light, Dry 8/10 6 Example 8 with 0.2% Light, Dry 7/10 Light, 8/10 2 IPM Dry/Smooth Example 8 with 0.5% Light, Smooth 6/10 Soft, Smooth 7/10 1 IPM
Example 8 with 0.8% Soft, Smooth 7/10 Soft, Smooth, 6/10 2 IPM Oily Example 8 with 1.0% Soft, Smooth 6/10 Heavy, Oily 8/10 2 IPM
Example 8 with 1.3% Heavy, 8/10 Heavy, Oily 7/10 5 IPM Smooth From the above Table 13 results it has been concluded that:
Of the various levels of isopropyl myristate added to the composition, after repeated cycles of use the test subjects preferred the compositions incorporating isopropyl myristate at levels of 0.5%, 0.8% and 1.0%. Of these the level of 0.5% was somewhat preferred over the levels of 0.8% and 1.0%.
Table 14. Test E, Site 2 Effect on feel of varying IPM concentration Effect on feel of varying After i2' No. After 31d No. Rank IPM concentration Application Application Example 8 without IPM Light, Dry 6/10 Light, Dry 8/10 6
- 22 -Example 8 with 0.2% Light, Dry 7/10 Light, 7/10 5 IPM Dry/Smooth Example 8 with 0.5% Light, Smooth 6/10 Soft, Smooth 7/10 1 IPM
Example 8 with 0.8% Soft, Smooth 9/10 Soft, Smooth, 7/10 1 IPM Oily Example 8 with 1.0% Soft, Smooth 8/10 Heavy, Oily 8/10 3 IPM
Example 8 with 1.3% Heavy, 7/10 Heavy, Oily 9/10 4 IPM Smooth From the above Table 14 results it has been concluded that:
Of the various levels of isopropyl myristate added to the composition, after repeated cycles of use the test subjects preferred the compositions incorporating isopropyl myristate at levels of 0.5%, 0.8% and 1.0%. Of these the level of 0.5% was somewhat preferred over the levels of 0.8% and 1.0%.
Table 15. Test E, Site 3 Effect on feel of varying IPM concentration After 10t No. After 31d No. Rank Application Application Example 8 without IPM Light, Dry 9/10 Light, Dry 8/10 5 Example 8 with 0.2% Light, Dry 8/10 Light, 6/10 4 IPM Dry/Smooth Example 8 with 0.5% Light, Smooth 8/10 Soft, Smooth 8/10 1 IPM
Example 8 with 0.8% Soft, Smooth 7/10 Soft, Smooth, 7/10 2 IPM Oily Example 8 with 1.0% Soft, Smooth 6/10 Heavy, Oily 7/10 2 IPM
Example 8 with 1.3% Heavy, 7/10 Heavy, Oily 8/10 6 IPM Smooth From the above Table 15 results it has been concluded that:
Of the various levels of isopropyl myristate added to the composition, after repeated cycles of use the test subjects preferred the compositions incorporating isopropyl myristate at levels of 0.5%, 0.8% and 1.0%. Of these the level of 0.5% was somewhat preferred over the levels of 0.8% and 1.0%.
- 23 -Table 16. Test F ¨Site 1 Effect on Feel of variation in level of Propylene Glycol After 1st No. After 311 No. Rank Application Application Example 8 with 0.2% Light, Dry 7/10 Light, 7/10 4 PG and 0.5% IPM Dry/Smooth Example 8 with 0.5% Light, Smooth 6/10 Soft, Smooth 7/10 PG and 0.5% IPM
Example 8 with 0.8% Soft, Smooth 6/10 Soft, Smooth, a 7/10 1 PG and 0.5% IPM bit tacky Example 8 with 1% PG Soft, Smooth 8/10 Soft, Tacky 7/10 3 and 0.5% IPM
Example 8 with 1.3% Soft, Tacky 6/10 Heavy, Tacky 7/10 4 PG and 0.5% IPM
From the above Table 16 results it has been concluded that:
Of the various levels of propylene glycol added to the composition, after repeated cycles of use the test subjects preferred the compositions incorporating propylene glycol at levels of 0.5%, 0.8% and 1.0%. Of these the level of 0.5% was somewhat preferred over the levels of 0.8% and 1.0%.
Table 17. Test F, Site 2 Effect on feel of variation in level of Propylene Glycol After 1st No. After 310 No. Rank Application Application Example 8 with 0.2% Light, Dry 7/10 Light, 8/10 5 PG and 0.5% IPM Dry/Smooth Example 8 with 0.5% Light, Smooth 6/10 Soft, Smooth 7/10 PG and 0.5% IPM
Example 8 with 0.8% Soft, Smooth 6/10 Soft, Smooth, a 8/10 2 PG and 0.5% IPM bit tacky Example 8 with 1% PG Soft, Smooth 7/10 Soft, Tacky 7/10 2 and 0.5% IPM
Example 8 with 1.3% Soft, Tacky 6/10 Heavy, Tacky 8/10 4 PG and 0.5% IPM
From the above Table 17 results it has been concluded that:
- 24 -Of the various levels of propylene glycol added to the composition, after repeated cycles of use the test subjects preferred the compositions incorporating propylene glycol at levels of 0.5%, 0.8% and 1.0%. Of these the level of 0.5% was somewhat preferred over the levels of 0.8% and 1.0%.
Table 18. Test F, Site 3 .. Effect on feel of variation in level of Propylene Glycol After 1st No. After 311 No.
Application Application Example 8 with 0.2% Light, Dry 7/10 Light, 7/10 PG and 0.5% IPM Dry/Smooth Example 8 with 0.5% Light, Smooth 8/10 Soft, Smooth 8/10 PG and 0.5% IPM
Example 8 with 0.8% Soft, Smooth 8/10 Soft, Smooth, a 7/10 PG and 0.5% IPM bit tacky Example 8 with 1% PG Soft, Smooth 8/10 Soft, Tacky 7/10 and 0.5% IPM
Example 8 with 1.3% Soft, Tacky 6/10 Heavy, Tacky 7/10 PG and 0.5% IPM
From the above Table 18 results it has been concluded that:
Of the various levels of propylene glycol added to the composition, after repeated cycles of use the test subjects preferred the compositions incorporating propylene glycol at levels of 0.5%, 0.8% and 1.0%. Of these the level of 0.5% was somewhat preferred over the levels of 0.8% and 1.0%.
Consolidated Conclusions relating to emulsions across all Tests D, E, F and Sites It is notable that for Tests D, E and F the preferred compositions chosen by the panellists at each of the sites were the same. This consistency of results is indicative of the experience of the panellists and clearly discernible differences in the results.
Test D
.. The majority of panellists across the three sites agreed on the composition with the preferred emollient with respect to skin feel. Their clear choice was the formulation with isopropyl myristate.
Test E
The majority of panellists agreed that the feel of the formula with IPM was significantly better than that of any other tested formulation. This was the case not only after the first application but more so after repeated applications. Similar results were obtained with the other formulations exemplified and at a
- 25 -range of isopropyl myristate concentrations up to 1.0% w/w and the most preferred level of isopropyl myristate was 0.5%.
In Tables 10 to 18 illustrate used Example 8, which contains triclosan as the biocide. Substitution of chlorhexidine gluconate for triclosan unsurprisingly gave substantially equivalent results with respect to skin feel.
As will be understood by those skilled in the art the antiseptic compositions can be formulated using other components and in other concentrations without departing from the inventive concept herein disclosed of incorporating isopropyl myristate to improve the feel of the product and enhance its propensity to be used.
Test F
As for Test D, the majority of panellists agreed on a composition with a preferred level of propylene glycol with respect to skin feel. The results were consistent across the cycles of use. The preferred composition incorporated propylene glycol at a level of 0.5%.

Claims (31)

1. A non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition which when used at a rate of less than 6m1 of composition for up to 60 seconds produces a level of biocidal efficacy equal to or greater than that produced by 6m1 of 60% v/v aqueous isopropyl alcohol in 60 secs as measured according to the test method of EN1500:1997, said composition characterised in that it comprises 0.2% w/w to 0.5% w/w of isopropyl myristate as an antipilling agent and phenoxyethanol.
2. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to claim 1 which is alcoholic and produces substantially the same or better level of biocidal efficacy by hand rubbing for 30 seconds using 3m1of the composition as is obtained using 6m1of 60% v/v isopropyl alcohol in 60 seconds as measured according to the test method of EN1500:1997.
3. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to claim 1 or 2 in the form of an ethanol based antiseptic hand rub composition.
4. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to claim 3 free from isopropyl caproate, isopropyl laurate, isopropyl palmitate and isopropyl stearate.
5. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to claim 3 or 4 wherein isopropyl myristate is the only derivative of myristic acid present in the composition.
6. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to any one of claims 2 to 5 further comprising a glycol.
7. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to claim 6 comprising dipropylene glycol.
8. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to claim 6 wherein the glycol is or includes dipropylene glycol in a concentration of from 0.25 to 4 times the concentration by wt of isopropyl myristate.
9. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to any one of claims 1 to 7 wherein the composition comprises phenoxyethanol at a concentration of 1% or less by wt.
10. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to any one of claims 2 to 9 in the form of an alcoholic gel.
11. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to claim 1 in the form of an emulsion or dispersion.
12. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to claim 11 free from isopropyl caproate, isopropyl laurate, isopropyl palmitate and isopropyl stearate.
13. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to claim 11 or 12 wherein isopropyl myristate is the only derivative of myristic acid present in the composition.
14. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to any one of claims 11 to 13 further comprising one or more glycols.
15. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to claim 14 wherein at least one of the glycols is a low molecular weight glycol.
16. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to claim 15 wherein the low molecular weight glycol is propylene glycol_
17. The non-pilling antiseptic hand rub composition according to any one of claims 11 to 16 wherein the composition comprises phenoxyethanol at a concentration of 1% by wt or less.
18. A method of improving the skin feel of an antiseptic hand rub composition which produces a level of biocidal efficacy equal to or greater than that produced by hand rubbing with 6m1 of 60% v/v isopropyl alcohol in 60 seconds, said method comprising the step of adding to the hand rub 0.2% w/w to 0.5% w/w of isopropyl myristate as an antipilling agent and phenoxyethanol.
19. The method according to claim 18 wherein the hand rub further comprises one or more glycols.
20. The method according to claim 19 wherein the glycol is or includes dipropylene glycol in a concentration of from 0.25 to 4 times the concentration by wt of isopropyl myristate.
21. The method according to any one of claims 18 to 20 wherein the hand rub is in the form of an alcoholic gel.
22. The method according to any one of claims 18 to 21 wherein the hand rub is in the form of an emulsion.
23. The method according to any one of claims 18 to 22 wherein the isopropyl myristate is the only derivative of myristic acid present in the composition.
24. The method according to any one of claims 18 to 23 wherein the isopropyl myristate is free from isopropyl caproate, isopropyl laurate, isopropyl palmitate and isopropyl stearate.
25. Use of 0.2% w/w to 0.5% w/w of isopropyl myristate as an antipilling agent and phenoxyethanol for improving the skin feel of an antiseptic hand rub composition which produces a level of biocidal efficacy equal to or greater than that produced by hand rubbing with 6m1 of 60% v/v isopropyl alcohol in 60 seconds.
26. The use according to claim 25 wherein the hand rub further comprises one or more glycols.
27. The use according to claim 26 wherein the glycol is or includes dipropylene glycol in a concentration of from 0.25 to 4 times the concentration by wt of isopropyl myristate.
28. The use according to any one of claims 25 to 27 wherein the hand rub is in the form of an alcoholic gel.
29. The use according to any one of claims 25 to 28 wherein the hand rub is in the form of an emulsion.
30. The use according to any one of claims 25 to 29 wherein the isopropyl myristate is the only derivative of myristic acid present in the composition.
31. The use according to any one of claims 25 to 30 wherein the isopropyl myristate is free from isopropyl caproate, isopropyl laurate, isopropyl palmitate and isopropyl stearate.
CA2896116A 2012-12-24 2013-12-19 Non-pilling antiseptic hand rub compositions comprising phenoxyethanol and isopropyl myristate as an antipilling agent Active CA2896116C (en)

Applications Claiming Priority (3)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
AU2012905697A AU2012905697A0 (en) 2012-12-24 Improved antimicrobial composition
AU2012905697 2012-12-24
PCT/AU2013/001489 WO2014100851A1 (en) 2012-12-24 2013-12-19 Improved antimicrobial compositions

Publications (2)

Publication Number Publication Date
CA2896116A1 CA2896116A1 (en) 2014-07-03
CA2896116C true CA2896116C (en) 2021-03-02

Family

ID=51019568

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
CA2896116A Active CA2896116C (en) 2012-12-24 2013-12-19 Non-pilling antiseptic hand rub compositions comprising phenoxyethanol and isopropyl myristate as an antipilling agent

Country Status (13)

Country Link
US (1) US10070644B2 (en)
EP (1) EP2934121B1 (en)
JP (1) JP6425660B2 (en)
KR (1) KR102143556B1 (en)
CN (1) CN105050398B (en)
AU (1) AU2013370926B2 (en)
BR (1) BR112015015054B1 (en)
CA (1) CA2896116C (en)
ES (1) ES2786084T3 (en)
HK (1) HK1213433A1 (en)
NZ (1) NZ710080A (en)
SG (2) SG10201705203VA (en)
WO (1) WO2014100851A1 (en)

Families Citing this family (8)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
DE102014115080A1 (en) * 2014-10-16 2016-04-21 Schülke & Mayr GmbH Use of fatty acid esters to improve the antimicrobial effectiveness of an alcoholic disinfectant
JP6866058B2 (en) * 2015-03-09 2021-04-28 株式会社大阪製薬 Viscous disinfectant
DE102016113210A1 (en) 2016-07-18 2018-01-18 Schülke & Mayr GmbH ALCOHOLIC DISINFECTANT WITH GOOD SKIN CARE AND HIGH EFFICIENCY
EP3520785A4 (en) * 2016-10-09 2020-05-27 Shenzhen Eulikan Biotechnology Co., Ltd. Uses of bacteriostatic agent formula in preparing composition for vaginal use and composition for vaginal use
EP3606343A1 (en) 2017-04-04 2020-02-12 Gojo Industries Inc Methods and compounds for increasing virucidal efficacy in hydroalcoholic systems
AU2019227891A1 (en) * 2018-03-01 2020-10-01 Gojo Industries, Inc. Alcohol-based hand conditioners for repeated use
JP7045750B1 (en) * 2021-06-30 2022-04-01 サラヤ株式会社 Alcohol-based rubbing-type hand disinfection composition with improved usability
WO2023276203A1 (en) * 2021-06-30 2023-01-05 サラヤ株式会社 Better-feeling alcohol-based rub-in hand sanitizer composition

Family Cites Families (16)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5403864A (en) 1993-04-01 1995-04-04 John A. Manfuso, Jr. Rapidly-acting topical antimicrobial composition
US6022551A (en) 1998-01-20 2000-02-08 Ethicon, Inc. Antimicrobial composition
MXPA02006960A (en) * 2000-01-18 2002-12-13 Unilever Nv Antimicrobial compositions comprising a salt of a transition metal chelator.
US6617294B2 (en) * 2000-10-20 2003-09-09 Vinod K. Narula Waterless sanitizing hand cleanser
AUPR622301A0 (en) * 2001-07-09 2001-08-02 Novapharm Research (Australia) Pty Ltd Infection control system
JP2004107667A (en) * 2002-09-18 2004-04-08 Vinod K Narula Sterilization detergent for hand
US7022316B2 (en) * 2003-02-25 2006-04-04 L'oreal Non-pilling UV-photoprotecting sunscreen compositions
DE102005002645A1 (en) * 2005-01-19 2006-07-20 Schülke & Mayr GmbH Alcoholic compositions for disinfection
CA2533950C (en) * 2005-01-28 2013-10-22 B. Braun Medical Ag Virucidal disinfectant
EP1887864B1 (en) * 2005-05-16 2020-02-12 Novapharm Research (Australia) Pty. Limited Composition for use in preparation of a patient for surgery
TW200727785A (en) * 2005-11-25 2007-08-01 Maruishi Pharma Gel composition for antibacterial sterilization
BRPI0712700A2 (en) 2006-05-31 2012-07-10 Neutrogena Corp clear protector compositions
TW201113091A (en) * 2009-06-15 2011-04-16 Gojo Ind Inc Methods and compositions for use with gel dispensers
FR2948872B1 (en) * 2009-08-04 2011-10-21 Oreal COSMETIC COMPOSITION COMPRISING AN OXYALKYLENE DERIVATIVE
US9089129B2 (en) 2011-10-07 2015-07-28 American Sterilizer Company Non-aerosol foaming alcohol hand sanitizer
WO2013192034A2 (en) * 2012-06-18 2013-12-27 Vi-Jon, Inc. Sanitizer compositions comprising alcohol and an antimicrobial efficacy enhancer

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
KR20150100863A (en) 2015-09-02
CA2896116A1 (en) 2014-07-03
US20150342181A1 (en) 2015-12-03
CN105050398A (en) 2015-11-11
CN105050398B (en) 2017-10-03
SG10201705203VA (en) 2017-07-28
WO2014100851A1 (en) 2014-07-03
NZ710080A (en) 2020-01-31
BR112015015054B1 (en) 2020-09-24
SG11201504967TA (en) 2015-07-30
EP2934121A4 (en) 2016-07-20
EP2934121B1 (en) 2020-02-05
KR102143556B1 (en) 2020-08-12
AU2013370926B2 (en) 2017-08-24
US10070644B2 (en) 2018-09-11
AU2013370926A1 (en) 2015-07-30
HK1213433A1 (en) 2016-07-08
EP2934121A1 (en) 2015-10-28
ES2786084T3 (en) 2020-10-08
BR112015015054A2 (en) 2017-07-11
JP6425660B2 (en) 2018-11-21
JP2016505576A (en) 2016-02-25

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
CA2896116C (en) Non-pilling antiseptic hand rub compositions comprising phenoxyethanol and isopropyl myristate as an antipilling agent
US7488757B2 (en) Invisible antimicrobial glove and hand antiseptic
JP4183830B2 (en) Alcohol-based antimicrobial composition having a cosmetic appearance
TWI498423B (en) Antimicrobial compositions
KR101583850B1 (en) Moisturizing hand sanitizer
CA2309353C (en) Surfactant-based antimicrobial compositions and methods for using same
JP5318351B2 (en) Compositions and methods for preoperative skin disinfection
BRPI0908882B1 (en) COMBINATION OF ACTIVE INGREDIENTS AND COSMETIC PREPARATION
JP2014534188A (en) Non-aerosol foamy alcohol hand sanitizer
US20040191274A1 (en) Topical composition
US20230329988A1 (en) Sanitizing compositions containing ionic liquid
CN113164361A (en) Personal care compositions
WO1998002139A1 (en) Liquid antiseptic soap for skin care
AU2006235798B2 (en) Topical composition
JPH10324624A (en) Bactericidal disinfectant composition
JP2006083111A (en) Disinfecting composition
WO2023053137A1 (en) Molecular iodine, alcohol, and propanediol based formulation and its application for relieving body odor
KR20040098400A (en) Healthcare hand,skinwashing compositions
MXPA99000782A (en) Antimicrobial compositions based on alcohol with appearance of cosmet

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
EEER Examination request

Effective date: 20181217